Tejaram etc vs State Advocate - P.P. — 2/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 16th March 2026.
Cr. Revision
CNR: RJCH010013192025
Filing Number
1125/2025
Filing Date
18-Dec-2025
Registration No
2/2026
Registration Date
09-Jan-2026
Court
DJ ADJ DISTRICT HQ CHURU
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
16-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing
Last updated 31-May-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
107
Police Station
Ratannagar
Year
2023
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Tejaram etc
Adv. Surendra Kumar Budania
Respondent(s)
-
1.State Advocate - P.P.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: Tejaram v. State (2/2026) The Sessions Court, Churu dismissed Tejaram's revision petition challenging the lower court's order that found prima facie case against him under Sections 19/54 and 54-D of the Rajasthan Excise Act. While the court upheld the lower court's discharge under Section 20/54 (as the seized liquor was government-authorized), it confirmed charges under Sections 19/54 and 54-D because the warehouse where liquor was stored on 20.10.2023 lacked formal approval—the petitioner had only applied for approval on 19.10.2023, making the storage a violation of license conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Mar-2026
Disposed
District and Sessions Judge
-
13-Mar-2026
Orders
District and Sessions Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
District and Sessions Judge
-
21-Feb-2026
Arguments on Applications / Bail Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
District and Sessions Judge
-
06-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
18-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2/2026
Case Summary: Tejaram v. State (2/2026) The Sessions Court, Churu dismissed Tejaram's revision petition challenging the lower court's order that found prima facie case against him under Sections 19/54 and 54-D of the Rajasthan Excise Act. While the court upheld the lower court's discharge under Section 20/54 (as the seized liquor was government-authorized), it confirmed charges under Sections 19/54 and 54-D because the warehouse where liquor was stored on 20.10.2023 lacked formal approval—the petitioner had only applied for approval on 19.10.2023, making the storage a violation of license conditions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts